| 5 Mar 2024 |
 Robert Hensing (roberth) | I'm not sure about the names, as a derivation builder is also the process that runs as the derivation, and recipe is a bit vague, but I suppose naming isn't the primary concern | 16:42:03 |
| Robert Hensing (roberth) | Also worth noting that instead of mkDerivation it should be a function that does most of those things, but no overrideAttrs. That must be handled by whatever goes into lib.encapsulate; we'll want a helper function make this kind of package. Can't ask packagers to write the above. | 16:44:05 |
 nbp | Yes, where there is no function application, and where lib.encapsulate would be called on anything which is typed as a package. | 17:00:55 |
 @jade_:matrix.org | In reply to @philiptaron:matrix.org
At work, we use a approve-commits model, instead of an approve-PR model, which makes the review process substantially lighter. I'm sad that GitHub doesn't let that happen, since I only get the chance to review the whole squashed PR. this kinda exists with the various pr stacking tools like pkgs.sapling and many others but erm. what if nixpkgs had gerrit, (do not use gerrithub btw it is very broken) | 17:49:00 |
 Philip Taron (UTC-8) | In reply to @jade_:matrix.org
this kinda exists with the various pr stacking tools like pkgs.sapling and many others but erm. what if nixpkgs had gerrit, (do not use gerrithub btw it is very broken) We also use and pay for Graphite but it's only OK. | 17:50:38 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | yeah | 17:51:34 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | it's kinda bad lol | 17:51:39 |
| @jade_:matrix.org | i have been working on gerrit recently on a private project and it has been nice | 17:52:05 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I've used Phabricator for the last decade and TBH I love it. https://we.phorge.it/ is the successor. | 17:52:36 |
|  @nscnt:matrix.org left the room. | 18:32:57 |
| 6 Mar 2024 |
|  @sammy:cherrykitten.dev joined the room. | 19:04:52 |
|  @ktemkin:katesiria.org joined the room. | 22:28:08 |
| 8 Mar 2024 |
 infinisil | @room The architecture team is being dissolved, please check out https://discourse.nixos.org/t/nixpkgs-architecture-team-conclusion-and-prospective/41020 for all the details! | 16:55:26 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) |
at some point somebody should just be empowered to make decisions.
♥️
| 16:56:13 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | *
at some point somebody should just be empowered to make decisions.
♥️ to this
| 16:56:30 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | I'm a little sad that this action is being taken:
Publicly archive the private Nixpkgs Architecture Matrix channel
... as having "direct line" to those interested in architecture and structure rather than the things being built with the structure is quite nice.
| 16:57:45 |
| nbp | I agree that keeping this channel might still be valuable. | 16:58:10 |
 Alyssa Ross | This room is being kept | 16:58:15 |
| Alyssa Ross | the "private Nixpkgs Architecture Matrix channel" is not this room | 16:58:24 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | In reply to @qyliss:fairydust.space
the "private Nixpkgs Architecture Matrix channel" is not this room 👀 I see | 16:58:44 |
| Alyssa Ross | This is "The public Nixpkgs Architecture Matrix room for ephemeral discussions", listed under "The following will continue to exist:" | 16:58:49 |
| nbp | why was there a private channel then? | 16:59:11 |
 @piegames:matrix.org | Is that question still relevant now? | 17:04:25 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | * I'm a little sad that this action is being taken:
Publicly archive the private Nixpkgs Architecture Matrix channel
... as having "direct line" to those interested in architecture and structure rather than the things being built with the structure is quite nice.
Sadness over: this room stays.
| 17:08:35 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | * I'm a little sad that this action is being taken:
Publicly archive the private Nixpkgs Architecture Matrix channel
... as having "direct line" to those interested in architecture and structure rather than the things being built with the structure is quite nice.
Sadness over: this room stays.
| 17:08:51 |
| nbp | I curious to understand what justified taking discussion in private instead of using this channel? | 17:14:43 |
| nbp | * I am curious to understand what justified taking discussion in private instead of using this channel? | 17:14:51 |
| Philip Taron (UTC-8) | *
at some point somebody should just be empowered to make decisions.
♥️ to this
| 17:17:42 |
 @jonringer:matrix.org |
Is that question still relevant now?
I think creating walls and barriers to contributions is always a relevant question in a FOSS community
| 17:26:39 |
| infinisil | It's main purpose was to discuss member applications and whether to approve them | 17:27:41 |
